YouTube shooting suspect dead; identified as female

(FeminamRadicalis)
The question is: what do they mean by female? Do they mean a biological woman born woman with XX chromosomes? Or do they mean a male who feeeeeeeeeeeeeels like a lady and therefore is somehow a "female"?

It will be a bit of time before we know. Since this is a tech company, the latter seems like a safer bet due to the glut of TIMs in tech. I will be very surprised if the assailant turns out to be an actual female, but stranger things have certainly happened. If the attacker is a TIM, I sense a push towards peak trans coming for the US.

(st_quiteria)
I'd rather not speculate. Amy Bishop is a woman, after all. Women occasionally have violent impulses and act on them for a whole host of reasons. Maybe you should consider deleting this comment before it gives the trolls ammunition.

(FeminamRadicalis)
I honestly could care less what the trolls / stalkers make of any comment I've made, this one included.

I did allow for the possibility that the shooter might be an actual woman by saying "stranger things have happened".

However, it is true that TIMs retain male patterns of crime rates and further that TIMs are per capita much better represented in tech than actual women are.

It's also interesting to simply consider that we are now at a point where we are forced to speculate if the use of the term "female" implies an actual biological woman or a male who says he feels like a woman. We can't know off the bat if this is a real woman or not, due to the rapid way in which that word has shifted in meaning over the past few years. That's quite chilling, really.

It's quite normal to speculate on current events such as this type of shooting, as they've very sadly become rather commonplace. You don't have to do so, and of course you're allowed to state that you don't want to and don't think others should either, but in turn I will state that I think it's perfectly fine to speculate and warranted in this case, since it's incredibly rare than an XX female would commit a crime like this (even though it does happen in a few extremely rare cases).

(NotSerenaJoy)
This. We are told the shooter is female, but that word is so meaningless in the mainstream now that we don't know what is meant by this information. We shouldn't be having to speculate about this. We should hear that a woman has shot people and be, "Woah! A female shooter, how crazy is that, what does this mean....." Instead we are here wondering, is it actually a woman? The shift in language because of the trans agenda is really messing with everything.

.
.
.

Because we are socialised to not be angry, but to be compliant and passive and most importantly, nice. It's internalised in us to not react violently and certainly not with deadly force. Even when we do reach boiling point, our socialisation still holds us back so that we never or at least very rarely react fully and release everything that is pent up inside of us. It's just not nice to be angry you know.

Men however are socialised in the opposite way. Be angry, be strong, stand up for yourself, don't take shit, never be compliant, get what you want at all costs. That sort of thing just screams "shoot everyone if they look at you funny".

(WrongToy)
I don't want to be blamed as a group for something a male may have done. I found so much of this account, from the 12-hour ride up from Riverside, the shooter knowing where the bf was, the suicide afterward, to have been so male-pattern.

This person is tall, wears scarves around the person's neck often, and in his performances is angry in a male way. Plus, in this person's country, SRS is the prescribed remedy for a gay male.

(Lil_Z)
The other thread appears to have been deleted, for reasons unknown. I hope it's not because the mods think it makes us 'look bad'. As you say, we are perfectly within our rights to speculate about this shooter's actual sex, given that the media is now regularly reporting male crimes as female ones.

Speaking of which, I think this person is almost certainly male. Take a look at the photos in this Daily Mail story, especially the one where he's holding a bunny. Looks like a male body, male neck, male face to me, and I'm a bit baffled that many don't seem to see it.

One of the comments on the DM site says 'Is that a man', but there are many more observing that something looks 'weird' or 'not right' about 'her' face. (One commenter says 'she' looks like an alien, while another says 'she' reminds him of an avatar from the Sims.) I guess femininity cues do throw people, such that their brain will categorise a male person as 'female' based on those cues, while also simultaneously observing that that isn't a female facial structure, hence the uncanny valley feeling that arises telling them that something is 'not right' about the face.

I don't think this will ever be admitted openly by the media. If he'd been a white, US-born TIM it probably would have been, as his trans status would likely have been part of both his social and online identities. But because he is (most likely) an Iranian gay man who transitioned very young, he's unlikely to have been open about being trans to many people, and I very much doubt his family will be inclined to mention it to the media either.

So now we can all be subjected to the joys of think pieces that ponder the meaning and motives of 'female' mass shooters. Just like when trans Twitter engineer Dana McCallum raped and beat his wife, one of the liberal rags (Slate I think) took the case as an opportunity to highlight the problem of 'lesbian' domestic violence.

In the next couple of years, we will probably see handwringing about the inexplicable rise in the number of 'female' rapists and pedophiles, which will allegedly show that our previous beliefs about these being male-pattern crimes were 'wrong'. It really is chilling, how completely the media is cooperating in this Orwellian reversal of reality.

(yishengqingwa666)
Sorry about your penis, inseminator.